Chicago Teacher's StrikeFollow

I.... I think I just had a moment with Almalieque.

Actually it reminded me of Mindel and I spent some time mooning over her.

So I guess it was cherished.

Whatever, Welfare Queen.

You're kidding right?

1. Teaching is not babysitting (despite comparisons suggesting otherwise). Outside of preschool and kindergarten (or some very special ed), teachers to not do play time, or change diapers (day care facilities charge significantly more for non-potty trained kids btw), or engage in significant individual activities with the students.

2. Pay does not scale linearly with number of children even in a day care or babysitting setting. Why should it when teaching? A good day care facility (full time) might cost $600/month. That works out to $15/hour/child. Yet, amazingly, a day care with 10 children for every worker doesn't pay their workers $150/hour (or $300,000/year).

3. Costs for education include the entire staff and facilities, not just the teachers in the room. When you account for total faculty compared to total students, it's closer to 10-1 ratio, not 30-1. So we should just not pay the rest of the staff? And I suppose those buildings are free too, right?

4. I could probably come up with more, but I'm honestly dumbfounded that anyone questioned that this is an incredibly flawed comparison with silly-math being used to make a moronic point.

For the government (or out of money coming from government grants), right? So not even remotely you selling your skills on a "free market". More like you suckling at the teat of "free" tax dollars. Our stimulus dollars at work, right?


That's not to say that private dollars don't result in ridiculous payouts to consultants too, but at least those dollars were accumulated as a result of those companies providing someone else with something they believed to be worth the amount paid in dollars they themselves earned (ie: free market). Thus, there's some expectation that said fees are considered worth the price. When it's government dollars involved, the amounts are like the scores on "Whose Line?".

In more seriousness, you'll want to constrain your counter-argument to actual "commercial" daycare facilities. Babysitters or home providers do typically get paid on a linear scale per kid seeing as how they're operating independently and charge a flat rate per head.

Edited, Sep 12th 2012 3:44pm by Jophiel

For the government (or out of money coming from government grants), right? So not even remotely you selling your skills on a "free market". More like you suckling at the teat of "free" tax dollars. Our stimulus dollars at work, right?

Meh, not really. Depends on how far down the rabbit hole you want to go on the "government grants" thing. Most of my clients are Fortune 500 companies. I'm sure they probably all do business with the government. Most of the work was from medical device/healthcare companies, so reimbursement rates effect them, etc. I haven't actually been paid by a US Govt check in about 9 years.

You seem to think I was arguing with the point. Next time you should take the criticism gracefully and let it help you be a better poster.

Next time you should take the criticism gracefully and let it help you be a better poster.

I twice said your criticism was valid Joph. What the hell do you want? A gold star?

How many baby sitters do you know who sit for 10 kids at once, let alone 30? As I stated in point 1, they are *not* remotely the same thing. So yeah. Criticism noted, but you're criticizing something I already addressed. Thanks I suppose, but not really needed IMO.

I'm being graceful in proportion to the usefulness of your criticism. But if you really need a pat on the head or something: Good boy!

Glad I could give you a laugh Joph. You seem way too wound up lately. Too much coffee?


In any case, the posted bit about teachers pay was pretty darn stupid. Can we at least agree on that? Teachers really aren't underpaid in general, and the ones in this district certainly aren't. They are paid more than most districts (all districts depending on whose numbers you use), work fewer hours than in most districts, and have one of the worst academic records of any district in the US . And they're going on strike why? Let's set aside unions in general and teachers in general and ask ourselves if these teachers specifically deserve higher pay/benefits/whatever than they're already getting?

I'd say no. Not just no, but hell no. They probably don't deserve the pay they're getting right now. And given the massive deficits their budget is suffering, to demand increases and go on strike over those things is pretty darn ridiculous. It just shows how far out of touch the far far left has become. They care more about their union power than they do about their jobs.

Edited, Sep 12th 2012 7:05pm by gbaji